Sunday, February 8, 2015

RBI Rating System Ineffective

RBI sets stage for a bank supervision overhaul
CAMELS set to give way to a more forward-looking rating system the central bank seeks cooperation from overseas regulators
 (Collected from Business Standard )
Manojit Saha / Mumbai Sep 13, 2012, 00:25 IST

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has decided to change the way it monitors and supervises banks in order to make the process more forward-looking. The move comes against the backdrop of the risks that have emerged after the global financial crisis of 2008, with lenders shifting from offering traditional products to more complex ones.

The country’s financial sector would now be evaluated under a dynamic risk-based mechanism, an aspect the present CAMELS rating system lacked, central banking sources said. RBI proposes to replace CAMELS with INROADS (Indian Risk-Oriented and Dynamic Rating System) from the next round of annual financial inspection, in 2013.

 At present, the central bank uses the CAMELS (Capital adequacy, Asset quality, Management, earnings, Liquidity, and Systems and control) method, to assign ratings to Indian banks. CAMELS, which goes from A+ to D is assigned to a bank while finalising the annual financial inspection (AFI) report.
CHANGING TACK
The changing landscape of banking supervision
  • CAMELS rating system to be phased out, as it lacks forward-looking assessment and merely represents banks’ performance
     
  • New system, INROADS, to capture the risks that may cause a bank to fail
     
  • Annual Financial Inspection report to be fast-tracked
     
  • Single-point contact at RBI to bridge regulatory gap
     
  • Information-sharing agreements with overseas regulators on cards


RBI has argued that the present form of rating captures only a few risk elements and represents a bank’s past-year performance. Besides, RBI is of the view, the present rating does not capture the risks that could cause a bank to fail.

According to sources, some of the broader risks, such as credit risk, operational risk, and strategic and business group risk, increase the probability of a bank’s failure.

In addition, the process of annual financial inspection has been expedited and it is now proposed that banks should address the areas of concern mentioned in AFI during a particular year. In a given year, AFI is undertaken for the previous year, and significant delays were noticed last year.

A high-level steering committee for the review of supervisory processes for banks, set up by RBI under the chairmanship of Deputy Governor K C Chakrabarty, has suggested the changes in the supervisory approach. Most of the suggestions have been accepted by the central bank.

The banking regulator is also entering into mutual regulatory cooperation agreements with regulators of other countries to extract information about Indian banks operating overseas and vice versa. RBI has already signed an agreement with 14-15 countries and is in talks with the US – a country where a majority of Indian banks have presence. Sources said since the US had three federal banking supervisors, the process might take some time.

The central bank is also planning to create a single-point contact for each bank in order to plug the regulatory lacuna. “It is quite often the case that information about a bank with one department of RBI is not known to other departments. So, a single-point contact will be created for each banks,” a source said.
http://business-standard.com/india/news/rbi-sets-stage-forbank-supervision-overhaul/486292/

PSU banks need to free themselves from government influence: Raghuram Rajan

Indian Express 20th May 2014 (My comments given below)
Pitching for greater operational flexibility to public sector banks, Reserve Bank Governor Raghuram Rajan today said they can become more competitive by distancing themselves from government influence.
“If public sector banks become competitive, and especially if they do so by distancing themselves from the influence of the government without sacrificing their ‘public’ character, they will be able to raise money much more easily from the markets.
“Indeed, the better performers will be able to raise more, unlike the current situation where the not so good performers have a greater call on the public purse. Competition will improve efficiency,” he said.
The remarks came in his annual day lecture of the Competition Commission of India (CCI).
Rajan said there are well-managed public sector banks across the world and even in India today.
“So, privatisation is not necessary to improve the competitiveness of the public sector. But a change in governance, management, and operational and compensation flexibility are almost surely needed in India to improve the functioning of most PSBs, as the P J Nayak Committee has just reiterated,” he added.
The Governor said a number of eminently practicable suggestions have been made to reform PSBs, such as creating a holding company to hold government PSB shares, increasing the length of PSB CEO tenures, breaking up the position of Chairman and CEO and bringing more independent professionals on bank boards, among others.
“We need to examine all these ideas carefully, many of which will help give public sector banks the flexibility to compete in the new environment,” Rajan said.
He noted that in the past PSBs had the best talent. But today, past hiring freezes have decimated their middle management ranks, and private banks have also poached talented personnel from PSBs.
“PSBs need to be able to recruit laterally, while retaining the talent they have, but to do so they need to be able to promise employees responsibility as well as the freedom of action,” he added.
Referring to financial inclusion, Rajan said the RBI will come out with new relaxations on business correspondents shortly.
Also, he said some of the entities that become payments banks may be very well suited to support or substitute commercial banks in reaching remote areas.
“In sum then, we can increase competition in the banking sector while, at the same time, strengthening banks by reducing the burden of obligations on them,” he said.
Speaking on the occasion, Competition Commission of India (CCI) chairman Ashok Chawla said the regulator has so far imposed more than Rs 8,000 crore worth penalties on various entities for anti-competitive practices.
The Commission has dealt with cases related to diverse sectors, he added.
He also said the regulator has so far received about 170 files pertaining to combination of entities.
CCI, which keeps a tab on unfair trade practices across sectors, has completed five years of existence.
My Comments are as follows 

I absolutely do not agree with the advice given by RBI Governor which prescribes more freedom to public sector banks so that these banks may become competitive. It seems to me ridiculous and untrue and hence unacceptable too.

In the year 1991, our government took the decision of following the path of liberalization, privatization and globalization under the leadership of the then Prime Minister Sri Narsimha Rao and under the guidance of great economist Sri Manmohan Singh. At that time too , it was told to the nation that public sector undertakings were unable to perform the best only because of government interference and bad governance and hence the then government took the decision to make these entities more free and liberal so that they may compete with their counterpart in private sector. Government decided to end license permit raj and gradually gave more and more freedom tp public sector.

Government with a view to create competition in the market and to make PSUs more efficient and competitive and people friendly,  allowed private sector to enter into banking, telecom , airlines etc. Unfortunately the medicine which was prescribed in the year 1991 to cure public sector and to improve health the health of PS banks, BSNL and Indian Airlines have failed to do so and rather they have contributed in making these Public sector undertakings more and more sick and are facing the risk of survival after enjoying freedom for last two decades and more.

Though government during last two decades provided huge capital support to PS banks, Indian airlines and to BSNL, these bodies are still facing capital crunch. Unfortunately these banks could not compete with new generation private banks like ICICI, HDFC and Axis banks, BSNL could not earn profit like Bharti and  Reliance, and Indian Airlines could not become performer better than Jet Airways, Sahara, or Kingfisher. Rather private sector entities in banking sector or telecom sector or airlines are able to earn more and more profit and are continuously on  growth trajectory under the same economic ( domestic as well as global),  and social conditions whereas internal health of public sector undertaking in these sector have deteriorated year after year.

It is undeniable true and known to all concerned that PSBs, Indian Airlines and BSNL all are surviving only because of Oxygen provided by Government though they have been given freedom to a great extent after 1991. 

Banks specially enjoy unlimited freedom in recruitment and promotions of their workforce, in setting up their loan policies, their interest rate structure for lending and what not. Before 1991 these banks were fully owned by government. But to make these banks competitive, government diluted their stake and allowed participation of people in share holdings.

 CEOs of banks were given freedom to frame their own lending and HR policies. But they completely failed to compete with private banks only because top officials of these banks remained slaves of ministers, politicians and big bosses of other regulating agencies like RBI. These CEOs inculcated flattery and bribery culture in their banks and hence the entire workforce became boss friendly sacrificing the interest of the organization they served.


Good performers were not liked by top officials in promotions whereas flatterers and bribe earners could get quickest promotions superseding several seniors. Officers like Ashok Khemka were placed in remote and critical centers and flatterers, corrupt and inefficient officers placed at cream places who could earn bribe and share with bosses.

 Bank management recruited officers in higher scale directly from market to give favour to their own kith and kin and to their friends and relatives or to earn bribe totally ignoring the career of two or three decade old experienced officers. This created a culture which was not all conducive for good performance but which created good environment for flatterers. And undoubtedly this is root cause of all problems faced by public sector banks. Same position is with BSNL and Indian Airlines.


Before 1991 , a bank officer could get hardly one promotion in 10 to 20 years whereas now bank management are so much liberal and free that an officer is getting four to five promotions in ten to fifteen years. They have merit oriented policies but the result of so called merit oriented policies have not improved the health of banks but helped in deterioration of health.

I am sure that health of public banks is not at all better than their health used to be before liberalization and privatization started in the year 1991. I therefore laugh when RBI suggest more freedom for PSBs to improve the health. Rather I think that RBI is trying to aggravate the sickness by treating the cause of sickness as cure for the sickness. They are committing the same blunder as Government of India for last two decades and more in curing the Indian economy with the medicine which in fact aggravated the illness of Indian economy.

No comments:

Post a Comment